Two Guesses

[J. J.]

After checking my crystal ball, some pigeon entrails, my ouija  board, and my tarot cards, channeling both The Amazing Criswell and Orson Wells, and speaking to the Delphic Oracle, John Titor, the time traveler, and Trixie, who wears a halter top in January and stands at the corner of Broad and Poplar Streets in North Philadelphia, I'm prepared to make to vague, completely irrational predictions that will take months and years to be proven correct, if in fact they are:

1.  In 2008, a Republican will be elected President of the United States.

2.  By 2016, the US will be beginning or in the midst of, a political re-alignment.

You read it here first (or did you?).

[J. J.]

What sort of re-alignment?

Political.   I was hungry and ate the pigeon before I got all the details.

[J. J.]

What sort of re-alignment?

Political.   I was hungry and ate the pigeon before I got all the details.

Bah J.J. Bah.

It's a roundabout way of saying, I have a gut feeling that politics will change dramatically in the next decade, that the 2010's will look like the 1980's or 1930's, but not this year.

[J. J.]

What sort of re-alignment?

Political.   I was hungry and ate the pigeon before I got all the details.

Bah J.J. Bah.

It's a roundabout way of saying, I have a gut feeling that politics will change dramatically in the next decade, that the 2010's will look like the 1980's or 1930's, but not this year.

So we will finally have three parties in the US:
The Greens
The Democrats
The Social Democrats

Good call   

I think it will be something dramatic, but I don't know what.  A few possibilities:

1.  An end to "racial" politics. (Good)
2.  A more authoritarian culture.  (Probably bad)
3.  Less religion in politics. (Good)
4.  More religion in politics. (Bad)
5.  A consensus on environmental issues. (Probably good)
6.  An end to "class warfare" politics. (Good)
7.  Division into class politics.  (Bad)

I don't know, but these are options.

[J. J.]

I have a advantage over most posters here; I'm old.  It gives me only a slight advantage, but I was around for the Reagan Re-alignment and was interested in politics then.

In July 1984, at the end of junior year in college, I had a class on American presidential elections; my class was assigned for the midterm to write a paper on if there was a political re-alignment.  After turning it in, our professor announced that he did not think there was a re-alignment.  In November 1984, after the election, he announced that he now believed that there was a re-alignment.


On July 22, 1984, I submitted a paper entitled Conservative Re-Alignment In America.

I concluded that we were completing a re-alignment and made four predictions:

1.  The re-alignment will take American politics in a conservative, though not necessarily Republican direction. (I would argue that WJC was more conservative than any president from 1961 to 1980.)

2.  The Yuppie will emerge as an important political group.

3.  Policy, especially economic policy, will be conservative.

4.  The parties will continue to lose influence.

I would argue that all four conclusions were correct (though you could argue that the parties didn't get too much weaker) and that those things pretty much explained American politics from 1980 until today. 

I'm suggesting that this pattern will be changing, perhaps as early as the next presidential election cycle (2012), probably no later than the cycle after that (2016).  I may not like it, but I think it is coming.

[J. J.]

Reasonable.  I would agree that the parties have not become stronger, rather the country has become more polarized, and that polarization has fallen along party lines, not necessarily strengthening the parties (or something like that).

When are you going to know for sure, so I can plan ahead.

If it's anything like like the last two, start looking at the off year elections.  My theory of a re-alignment period is that it takes 6 years.  In 1978, the Republicans scored some solid gains, and the newly elected Democrats elected were much more conservative.  That's the first sign. 

The second will be a radically different president and usually an electoral blowout.  Think 1932 or 1980.

[J. J.]

I don't disagree, but I am curious as to why 2016, as opposed to 2012. Both McCain and Clinton could fit the role as the tail end of the current cycle of politics. Both Hoover and Carter were 1-term presidents before the respective realignments.

I think the House is less Democratic today than it was even after the 1978-84 re-alignment, so I'm not seeing a major change.

Another point is policy.  The Republicans, and the old bole weevil Democrats, made some massive changes, including a real reduction in tax rates and indexing.  Some of these, Kemp-Roth for example, were proposed in the 1979-81 period.  We've seen no real proposals from the Democrats in Congress; they seem to be adrift.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I need not remind you that Reagan lost in 1976, the first time he put forth the "big picture rhetoric."

I've got admit, some of this is gut reaction, but I think Clinton will be the nominee.  This isn't Obama's year, but he will have one, or two.

Keep in mind that I see re-alignments as being something other than a "short sharp shock," but as a period of change lasting about six years; I don't think we've yet started that period, but we are getting closer by the minute.  2016 is "in the midst of a re-alignment," which means it could begin as early 2010.  I just don't think it's starting in 2008.

[J. J.]

While we're on this subject, it could also be argued that though 1984 may have been the election marking a realignment in which conservatism became a dominant philosophy and political force, that the preceding sixteen years from 1968 to 1984 was a period of transition as the old New Deal coalition disintegrated and liberalism became discredited.  Similarly, 2008 could serve the same negative role that 1968 did, marking the beginning of the end of the Reagan coalition and the discrediting of conservatism as a political philosophy.  Yet, according to this time scale, it probably won't be until 2024 that a new political philosophy (whatever it may be) would arise as a dominant political force.  In other words, are we about to enter unto another sixteen year period of transition? 

In 1976 Carter, barely, re-assembled the New Deal coalition.  There was also no real change in  Congress, though two temporary blips in 1946 and 1952, which were reversed two years later.  It was marked by the influx of new voters, African Americans, which by 1984 were the most solidly Democratic component.

I would also note that many of the ideologies of New Deal realignment were incorporated from the Progressives and the Socialists.  IIRC, the Socialists said that they were no longer needed,  because Roosevelt had done what they wanted.

I would argue that every POTUS from FD Roosevelt to Carter (yes, even Nixon) was more liberal than every POTUS from Reagan through GW Bush (yes, even WJ Clinton).

[J. J.]

You certainly raise an interesting point about realignments; it's more about the culture and the views of the two parties themselves rather than one party becoming dominant. We may be seeing the beginnings of a progressive realignment with the Republicans nominating McCain, who it could be argued is the most liberal Republican nominee since Ford. Realignments result in both parties moving in one direction, such that the partisan balance doesn't necessarily change, but yet one side's arguments pretty much become accepted as true and both sides evolve to the new climate.

I do think it is cultural, absolutely.  I would argue that, mainstream, homosexuality and drug use were more accepted in the 1970's than in the 1980's and possibly even today.  I can give you one example.  Johnny Carson in the late 1970's very early 1980's would often make jobes about the band smoking pot.  After the mid-1980's he didn't and on reruns the jokes were censored.  That's just a small detail, but it is indicative.

As to McCain being more liberal, I would call him as conservative as RJ Dole or GHW Bush, but clearly, he's more than a few steps to the right of Nixon or Ford. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think a lot of things are probably not going to go in that direction, but the environment is one where there may be an emerging consensus.  A broader acceptance of personal relationships may be one.

I don't know what will happen, but I expect changes (including some I probably will not like).  I actually think that we could go into a much more restrictive society or a more divided one.

I am suggesting that we watch for these changes.  I don't think we'll being to see them in this cycle, but in the next one, we might.  Muon might be right, it could have started and even the nomination of Obama, on the ticket, may be a sign.  I don't think that will happen, this time.  That part of my guess we'll be able to see by November.

[J. J.]

What is being hinted at when "authoritarian culture" is spoken of?

Nothing is being "hinted at."  I'm saying that it is a possibility to see an erosion of individual rights and a more pervasive federal government.

[J. J.]

...such as...

I was hungry and ate the pigeon before I got all the details.

It's too early to tell, but it is possible.

[J. J.]

...such as...

I was hungry and ate the pigeon before I got all the details.

It's too early to tell, but it is possible.

So, just "big government" in general....with the uncertainities being on social issues. Heck, social issues might not change at all... just economic ones.

AW, I listed a series of "might be" options.  You asked about one.  I'm saying, watch for major changes.  I can see something coming, but I don't know what.

[J. J.]

In general, a re-alignment produces changes in:

1.  Electoral behavior (who votes for whom).

2.  Electioneering tactics (how a campaign is run). 

3.  Candidate recruitment (who runs).

4.  Elite coalition behavior (who sides with whom).

5.  Formulation of public policy (after the election, what difference does it make).

Now, I would argue that there were changes in all of these after the 1978-84 realignment.

How these changes will work after the next re-alignment, I don't know.

Even in 1984, I did not expect everything that we saw in the post 1984 political world.

[J. J.]

In general, a re-alignment produces changes in:

1.  Electoral behavior (who votes for whom).
You mean the change of voting blocs?
2.  Electioneering tactics (how a campaign is run). 
You mean whether you push to or from the center?
3.  Candidate recruitment (who runs).
You mean how moderate and radical the candidates are?
4.  Elite coalition behavior (who sides with whom).
You mean what comprises the main parties?
5.  Formulation of public policy (after the election, what difference does it make).
You mean the actual changes in the law?
Now, I would argue that there were changes in all of these after the 1978-84 realignment.

How these changes will work after the next re-alignment, I don't know.

Even in 1984, I did not expect everything that we saw in the post 1984 political world.

1.  Yes.

2.  No.

3.  No.

4.  No.

5.  Somewhat, but also in terms of policy.

[J. J.]

The two ideas you gave us seems to me, at least, that there are two real possibilities-

- A new progressive era of class politics and victorian culture

I sincerely doubt THAT is ever going to happen. 

Ah, but think of the clothes!  I'm really looking forward to my monacle and mutton chops.

And the music!  "I am the Captain of the Pinafore..."

Bow, Bow, ye lower middle classes.  Bow, bow, ye tradesman, bow ye masses.

[J. J.]

In general, a re-alignment produces changes in:

1.  Electoral behavior (who votes for whom).
You mean the change of voting blocs?
2.  Electioneering tactics (how a campaign is run). 
You mean whether you push to or from the center?
3.  Candidate recruitment (who runs).
You mean how moderate and radical the candidates are?
4.  Elite coalition behavior (who sides with whom).
You mean what comprises the main parties?
5.  Formulation of public policy (after the election, what difference does it make).
You mean the actual changes in the law?
Now, I would argue that there were changes in all of these after the 1978-84 realignment.

How these changes will work after the next re-alignment, I don't know.

Even in 1984, I did not expect everything that we saw in the post 1984 political world.

1.  Yes.

2.  No.

3.  No.

4.  No.

5.  Somewhat, but also in terms of policy.

could you elaborate,then?

I did.

The re-alignment will not take place in this cycle.

[J. J.]

I would be completely fine with a political reallingment of some sort. I think these past 30 years or so have done much to hurt and weaken America, its time we enact some real reforms and stop thinking about the present and instead focus on the future.

Well, JJ seems to be predicting even more of the right wing policies that have hurt and weakened america (or to be more precisely the vast majority of americans) over the last 30 years... not less.

I think it is true that the nonsense ideologies of the right, such as individual responsibility and the Horatio Alger myth, remain just as embedded in the upcoming generations.  On the 'social' side I'm not quite so sure that the hateful intolerance is increasing, but it is true that it is too optimistic to say it is going away.

One wonders, however, just how far a realignment can go against reason and evidence - most americans been getting poorer for 30 years.. will they continue to embrace the policies that made this occur for another 30?  It is possible.

Ultimately people are almost unbelievably controlled by their programming. 

Poor Opebo, the syphilis has finally affected his brain.

I've posted that I don't know what the changes will look like, only that I think there is a likelihood that there will be major changes.  Left, right, some entirely different direction, I don't know.

BTW, we no longer need Horatio Alger.  We have Oprah Winfrey and Barack Obama. 

[J. J.]

Is a further right-wing strengthening even a realignment? Perhaps it is just continuation of the current one.

Yes, and the changes may not fit the traditional left-wing/right-wing mold.  The McKinley re-alignment was not a party change, but there were difference.

If I can use an analogy:

I'm standing on a straight dirt road on a dry, relatively level, plain.  I look up the road, miles away and see a dust cloud, moving own the road.  It's probably not a dust devil, but what is it?

1.  A group of people walking and kicking up dust?

2.  A horse?  A horse with a rider? 

3. A vehicle?  A moped? A Segway?  An ATV?  A car?  A pickup truck?  A tractor trailer?  A motercycle?  A tank?  A horse and buggy?

4.  How many?  One?  Two dozen?

5.  How far?  Probably not within one or two miles, but maybe 5 or 10.

I can see that something is coming, but I don't know what.  I may like what is coming , but I may not either.

[J. J.]

Just for the record, you might want to look at the works of V. O. Key regarding re-alignments.

Also, I probably won't be one after the next one.

[J. J.]

V.O. Keys? Gotcha.

No, "Key," no "s" on the end.  Here is some background:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V.O._Key,_Jr.

[J. J.]

Race and class will become less important, but economic wellbeing will be critical and religion will be a major factor. Expect a huge tug-of-war between the reliious right and the secularist left. It'll be messy.

It could be, or, conversely, we could see a reduction in the importance of moral issues.  The collapse of Huckabee could be a harbinger of that.

[J. J.]

I don't know which way the country will be going, only that there will a massive change.  I don't expect it this year.

[J. J.]

Didn't this already happen in 1988-1996?

No.

[J. J.]

Didn't this already happen in 1988-1996?

No.

In 1988, a Republican was elected, and by 1996, there was a sea change in elite behavior and political coalitions in the parties. The New Deal coalition was finally dead below the Presidential level, and the GOP broke through in the South.

Arguably, that happened in 1978-84.

[J. J.]

Didn't this already happen in 1988-1996?

No.

In 1988, a Republican was elected, and by 1996, there was a sea change in elite behavior and political coalitions in the parties. The New Deal coalition was finally dead below the Presidential level, and the GOP broke through in the South.

Arguably, that happened in 1978-84.

Yeah. Though, one could argue that 1988-1996 was the final death blow. What we will see here, between 2006 and say 2020 is whether the democratic party can reinvent itself or if we are heading to a Right-wing One-Party America, like antebellum America.

No.  The Democratic party was basically out of power from 1860 until 1930  (though there were  8 years of a Democratic President).  Long term, there will be a two party system.